[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.02.2208261344480.28812@file01.intranet.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 13:50:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wait_on_bit: add an acquire memory barrier
On Fri, 26 Aug 2022, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That code sequence really doesn't matter, but it was interesting
> seeing the generated code. Not pretty, but the ugliest part was
> actually how the might_sleep() calls in those helper functions result
> in __cond_resched() when PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is on, and how horrid that
> is for register allocation.
Perhaps, use __attribute__((no_caller_saved_registers)) on
__cond_resched() ?
Mikulas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists